Miami archbishop: raise the minimum wage [CC]

[zz912]

How is it not voluntary if people are voting on the matter? What does a vote mean if not an expression of the people’s will? We pay far more stuff that only politicians get to vote on, so if Swedes get to vote on their taxes more power to them.

Besides, if I have to believe the figures I see quoted here, there are very few unemployed in Sweden so their brand of socialism is at least not the great disincentive to work that it’s being made out to be.

I’m not sure you understand what the word voluntary means. If it were voluntary, then why is there a vote? What purpose does the vote serve? Answer: it enshrines into law the requirement that all people do something and if they don’t a threat of force will make them do it.

That is NOT voluntary.

 

[zz912]

The fallacy in your argument is the assumption that everyone in Switzerland will get the money. I believe that it is some kind of a floor, so that if your income is over $2800, you don’t collect. However, if your income is $1000, then you will be brought up to the $2800 level, The financial experts in Switzerland have figured it out and it will cost less than 1% of the budget to bring everyone up to the level of $2800 per month.

Not a fallacy, but an incorrect presentation by you. You made no qualifiers, and said that everyone was getting $2800 per month.

Now let’s run this through the calculator and see if it makes any sense:

Their budget is roughly $65b, so 1% is $650 million. So for the population being paid, their payments will range from $1-$2800 per month. So what is the average payment to a person? Let’s be safe and assume only $1,000. And how many people would they pay? Let’s ballpark it at 5% of the population (400,000), since we need to include the unemployed, and those who make less than $2800/month.

Even with these very conservative numbers, the total is $4.8 billion, or about 7% of their budget. A far cry from the nonsense of less than 1%.

Now let’s add a little reality. A program like this creates something called moral hazard. Those out of work, and those who work for $2800 or less have no incentive now to find employment or remain employed. This applies even to those who earn even higher than $2800 as they would rather exchange some money for free time and no work. So in reality, what will happen is that the average payment will be much higher, and the amount of people paid will skyrocket. It is economics, there is simply no getting around it.

So if the number of people paid goes much higher, say to 600,000, and average payments go to $1500, the cost goes to almost $11 billion. And in a worst case scenario, say 1 million people and $2,000, the cost goes to $24 billion.

So there is absolutely NO WAY this program will be less than 1% of the budget. Absolutely. No. Way. This claim will rank right up there with the CBO projections for the future costs of Medicare, which were off by a factor of 20 IIRC.

 

[stevegravy]

I’m not sure you understand what the word voluntary means. If it were voluntary, then why is there a vote? What purpose does the vote serve? Answer: it enshrines into law the requirement that all people do something and if they don’t a threat of force will make them do it.

That is NOT voluntary.

Like two wolves and a sheep vote on what’s for dinner? That voluntary !

 

[estesbob]

Switzerland does not give every citizen$2,800 a month.What had happened is a group gathered 100,000 signatures on a petition which per Swiss law means there will be a national vote on it. The date of the vote has not been set and it ifs given little chance of passing.

 

[stevegravy]

How can all right thinking proletarians, with brotherly love in hearts full of social justice, not see the perfectly wonderful effect of raising the minimum wage, which combined with the aftershocks of Obamacare inflicted on American masses, and the liberation from work that dear leader, party chairman and comrade president Barack Husanovish Obama (PBUH) brings, yet more workers will be able to spend leisure time creating great works of art and poetry. All hail and praise dear leader, party chairman and comrade president for our liberation from bourgeoisie oppression and slavery.

 

[seekerz]

We vote on taxes? I missed that on the ballot.

We were having a side discussion about Sweden. My bad.

 

[seekerz]

I’m not sure you understand what the word voluntary means. If it were voluntary, then why is there a vote? What purpose does the vote serve? Answer: it enshrines into law the requirement that all people do something and if they don’t a threat of force will make them do it.

That is NOT voluntary.

If that’s the way you define voluntary, then modern life is almost completely “involuntary”? Just about everything about our lives is governed by laws, no?

 

[ishii]

We vote on taxes? I missed that on the ballot.

In Washington state we do.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Eyman

Ishii

 

[zz912]

If that’s the way you define voluntary, then modern life is almost completely “involuntary”? Just about everything about our lives is governed by laws, no?

That is certainly the goal of the left, to get rid of voluntary actions. Maybe we should get rid of many of the excessive laws and regulations which encroach on our lives all the time.

 

[Tomdstone]

That is certainly the goal of the left, to get rid of voluntary actions. Maybe we should get rid of many of the excessive laws and regulations which encroach on our lives all the time.

Specifically, which law do you want to get rid of?

 

[zz912]

Specifically, which law do you want to get rid of?

Obamacare, the dept of education, department of labor, a good rollback of the ADA (went way too far), either end SSI or at least change it to a 401k style plan, Patriot Act, most of the federal drug laws,

That’s just a start

 

[Bklynguy]

Less than 5% of the workforce actually make minimum wage. Most people make more than that after only a few months. Employers don’t pay you more than minimum wage out of the kindness of their hears–they do so because they don’t want to have to find someone to replace you when you move on.

Let’s stop the emotional charade on the minimum wage.

The Archbishop should stick with administering the sacraments and shepherding his flock, not advising on economic policy that would actually hurt the poor, rather than help them.

 

[Ender]

The Archbishop should stick with administering the sacraments and shepherding his flock, not advising on economic policy that would actually hurt the poor, rather than help them.

Reasonable arguments can be made that the minimum wage should or should not be raised but no reasonable argument can be made that one position is more moral than the other, which is the unfortunate implication given when an archbishop publicly supports one of them. His involvement in this issue was not helpful.

Ender

 

[freeRadical]

Obamacare, the dept of education, department of labor, a good rollback of the ADA (went way too far), either end SSI or at least change it to a 401k style plan, Patriot Act, most of the federal drug laws,

That’s just a start

I would add to that:

The Department of Energy
The Department of Health and Human Services
The Department of Homeland Security
The FCC
The ICC
The IRS

 

[JamesCaruso]

What about the EPA as we now know it, and the Federal Reserve Board?

 

[ishii]

Less than 5% of the workforce actually make minimum wage. Most people make more than that after only a few months. Employers don’t pay you more than minimum wage out of the kindness of their hears–they do so because they don’t want to have to find someone to replace you when you move on.

Let’s stop the emotional charade on the minimum wage.

The Archbishop should stick with administering the sacraments and shepherding his flock, not advising on economic policy that would actually hurt the poor, rather than help them.

 

[pnewton]

The Archbishop should stick with administering the sacraments and shepherding his flock, not advising on economic policy that would actually hurt the poor, rather than help them.

This* was* him shepherding his flock. I am sure that politicians have no end of people that want to give them (name removed by moderator)ut…

… just like bishops have no end of people that think they know more about how to shepherd than he does.

 

[Bklynguy]

This* was* him shepherding his flock. I am sure that politicians have no end of people that want to give them (name removed by moderator)ut…

… just like bishops have no end of people that think they know more about how to shepherd than he does.

If that was him shepherding his flock, that would suggest that the opposite position is immoral, which isn’t true. It’s a known economic fact that the government forcing up labor costs by fiat reduces employment on those trying to get their foot in the door.

The Archbishop instead could be talking about politicians who enshrine abortion rights approaching the altar for communion and, perhaps, even refusing it to them. That is a straight up black and white moral issue in the catechism.

 

[seekerz]

If that was him shepherding his flock, that would suggest that the opposite position is immoral, which isn’t true. It’s a known economic fact that the government forcing up labor costs by fiat reduces employment on those trying to get their foot in the door.

The Archbishop instead could be talking about politicians who enshrine abortion rights approaching the altar for communion and, perhaps, even refusing it to them. That is a straight up black and white moral issue in the catechism.

And a just wage is not a Catholic moral issue? Who but the Pope can tell an Archbishop what not to talk about? So the Pope is saying what about these issues…?

 

[pnewton]

Who but the Pope can tell an Archbishop what not to talk about?

Here is a philosophical thought for you seeker. Which is more unreasonable, a bishop who assumes the role of a citizen, or a layman who assumes the role of the Pope?

Isn’t it rather glaring hypocritical to criticize a bishop for overstepping* his* bounds?